On Fri Feb 13 01:53:07 2009, kjs wrote: > On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 12:55 AM, jerry gay <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 15:53, Will Coleda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 6:09 PM, kjstol <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Will Coleda via RT < > > >> [email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >>> On Tue Jul 04 19:30:44 2006, [email protected] wrote: > > >>> > IMCC currently relies on a lot of static globals to carry > state, and > > >>> > cannot reliably restore them when an error occurs. (grep for > > >>> > "static" and "FIXME global" in the IMCC tree.) > > >>> > > > >>> > Allison had ruled that reentrancy should be possible for IMCC, > and > > >>> > this would be a good refactoring project. > > >>> > > >>> We've rejected a lot of "clean up IMCC" tickets with the thought > that > > we > > >>> eventually want PIRC to take over. Anyone think this falls into > the > > same > > >>> category? > > >>> > > >> > > >> I would like to indicate that while most of PIRC's done, it's not > > finished > > >> yet. Major issue now is the bug with STRING and FLOATVAL > constants bug > > >> (there's 1 or 2 tickets on that). I haven't really had the energy > or > > time to > > >> work on that recently. The rest is just a matter of test+fix > cycle; I'm > > sure > > >> there's all sorts of cases that should be tested more properly > than I've > > >> done. So, although I'm confident that together we can fix PIRC, > don't > > throw > > >> out imcc just yet.. > > >> > > >> kjs > > > > > > To be clear, I'm not saying "throw out IMCC", I'm saying, "Let's > not > > > bother trying to fix tricky bits of IMCC if we're just going to > throw > > > it out later." > > > > > i want to go into production (1.0) knowing what's broken in imcc > > rather than hiding the broken things in closed/rejected tickets. > what > > do we get by hiding bugs? surprises. i could use fewer of those--my > > teeth still hurt from that surprise trip to the dentist this week. > > > > ~jerry > > > Then it needs to be documented (perhaps in the book) that imcc is not > reentrant. (not entirely sure what that implies, though, as I think > that > :immediate .subs load'ing_bytecode works now) > > kjs
Let's create a trac wiki page that shows known issues in IMCC that will be hopefully be addressed by PIRC; we can link back to the (then rejected) old tickets. -- Will "Coke" Coleda _______________________________________________ http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
